[pianotech] justify pitch raise

[Ron Nossaman]

Leslie Bartlett wrote:
> My question is "How do the strictly aural tuners justify or "prove" a 
> need for serious pitch raise, convincing people of the veracity of the 
> claim?"  

I've never been asked to prove it. I discuss the possibility 
over the phone when the appointment is made, explaining that 
I'll cheerfully tune it in one pass if I can, but if I can't, 
the pitch raise will be necessary. On site, I'm almost always 
there by someone's referral, so I'm pre-qualified at some 
minimum level of trust by someone else that was trusted enough 
to be asked for a referral. Not immediately trying to sell 
them a vacuum job and caster polishing further establishes 
trust and the illusion of legitimacy, as does the presence of 
a tuning fork. People here are more impressed with aural 
tuning and judgment than they are with absolute measurement 
displays, but that's another topic under a different heading. 
I got a listen to Kent's tuning at the CWRS using Bernard's 
software, and the effect is very much like what I try to do 
aurally, only better than I can do it. So I'm not a fork snob.

One other thing that does fit here is what constitutes a 
"serious" pitch raise. I've been reading for years here that 
anything beyond 2 cents off requires a pitch raise. If anyone 
is actually successfully enforcing that protocol, then they 
are spoiled beyond my wildest dreams by either perfect climate 
control, or customers rich and gullible enough to pay extra 
for pitch adjustments twice a year. I doubt that in the 30+ 
years I've been doing this, I've tuned more than a couple of 
pianos that were within 2 cents. In school systems, 
particularly, rarely less than 20 cents off (at least in 
places) twice a year.

So like with everything else, there's no simple answer.
Ron N